The Sun. — London, England, 1838-03-08 00:00:00

PRIVATE BUSINESS OF PARLIA- AIENT.-(YESTERDAY.) COMMITTEE ON NOTTING HILL BILL—(MIDDLESEX LIST.) Lord GEORGE LENNOX in the Chair, Mr. S. Morro addressed the Committee against the evidence which had been produced in favour of stopping up the right of footpath. He contended that the whole of that evidence merely related to the Uxbridge road on the one side, and the Harrow road on the other, That was not the point germain to the matter; but the point deeleedly was whether the footpath were or were not a convenience or a nuisance. That it was the former might easily be inferred from his Learned Friend's not having called a single inhabitant residing in the immediate .neighbourhood of the footway over the race-course, to prove the cote. trary. Had it been otherwise, surely they would have adduced such people as the best evidence to prove the great annoyance which it was alleged by his Learned Friends, this footway occasioned. Besides, the witnesses called by them admitted that there was not any other path so good or so agreeable as the one over Notting-hill; nor, in short, any other path at all, excepting one, making a detour of at least half a mile further. They also proved—although they endeavoured to prove the contrary,—that, from its super-stratum being an alluvial soil, and its substratum clay for a considerable depth, there must consequently be more natural drainage from such a soil than from any other, which of course must make it drier. Even women and chil dren were enabled to, and did, take exercise there every day during all parts of the year. The neighbourhood of the Potteries, On the contrary, where it was sought to drive the public by another footpath, was aptly described by one of these witnesses, Mr. Brathwaite, the en. gineer, as "a colony of pigs," from the beastly state in which it was always found. The Learned Counsel then commented with great point upon the scientific evidence they had called. No less than one engineer and three surveyors were called instead of res pectable inhabitants of the vicinity —one of whom Mulli. her he had to thank for actually declaring that, by the Potteries, that colony of pigs, there was no footpath at all. There had been only one witness called, who was an inhabitant of the vicinity of the road. The Learned Counsel then adverted to the evidence ofhis own witnesses, wherein it would beobserved by the Committee that they confined their testimony to that which they could allege of their own knowledge only. He left it to the Committee to say whether these witnesses had or had not proved distinctly that the footpath over Notting.hill was the greatest accommodation to those Who now sought by every legal means in" their power, to have it kept open. The Learned Counsel then commented upon the conduct of Mr. White in first stopping up, ille gally, this ancient footway, and then " treating a number of inhabitants of the neighbourhood to no less than nine actions at law I" Without meaning to impugn the motives of Mr. White, he (Mr. Motte) could not conceive such conduct but quite fair. The witnesses he had called, it would be observed were respectable inhabitants on the very spot, and in the immediate neighbourhood of the footpath; and they had one and all testified that the footpath was an accommodation, Meat agreeable and free from any nuisance ; and that the effect of stopping up, or obstructing it, would be to deprive them of one of the greatest advantages the neighbourhood afforded, whether considered in relation to objects of business or recreation. Mr. Motte concluded a long speech by commenting upon the Bill itself, denying the truth of its preamble, and the justice of its objects. The Bill might as well have declared that a foot-path w•as not a footpath, or that, if it were, it should be closed, as what it did declare. Mr. White first tried to do that which he avowed he had a right to do ; but, finding it was resisted as illegal, lie now sought to carry a Bill through Parliament for a purpose, which he (Mr. Matte) trusted the Committee would not sanction, as, if it were effected, it must be considered as a downright fraud and robbery upon the public. Mr. Sergeant MERBWEATIIER then addressed the Committee on the other side. He complained that Mr. Standish Motte had not gone into the question of equivalent compensation offered to the inhabitants by Mr. White. He (Sergeant Mereweather) would be brief, and confine himself to the fact of the path being useful, necessary, and agreeable. It seemed to him that recreation was the chief object of those who advocated the right of path. The Committee would do well to recollect that, in lieu of the mere right of way, Mr. White offered to them the whole of the inclosure of Notting Hill, in. cludiqg the Hippodrome —open to the public every Sunday, which would be an obvious advantage over the present right, which was merely that of passing along the footpath, without the legal :right to deviate at all from the path. Then, as to the utility of the footpath the Learned Serjeant denied that it was useful during the winter season, from the swampy nature of its soil; and that consequently it was all but deserted. All this was evident from the cross-examination on the other side. The vtstry meetings, too, at Kensington seemed to have had strange pro. eeedings, for they seemed merely to have resolved, as a sort of dictum, that they would keep the footpath over Notting-hill, and they would not have anything to do with the one by Portobello-lane, offered to the pub lic Ju lieu of it. Surely the Committee would see that no notice could be taken of the proceedings at meetings where such resolutions were adopted. The fact was, that Mr. White offered at his own cost both a better foot-path, and also a horse and carriage road by Portobello lane. Indeed the only question Was which would be better, for things to remain as they are, or to be altered in the way Mr. White proposed; which latter, the Learned Sergeant contended, would be far more advantageous. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw; after which the Committee decided that the a l Aeration proposed by Mr. Whiteas a substitute (under certain regulatiAns) appeared reasonable and good. It was th,zn determined that the details of the Bill should be gone into to-morrow at 12 o'clock, until which time the Committee adjourned. ELECTION COMMITTEES. (YESTERDAY.) READING. The Committee met this day at two o'clock, Sir E. T. TRoUDRIDEE in the chair. Mr. Rogers, Mr. Austin, and Mr. Talbot appeared for the peti tioner; Mr. Sergeant Merewether and Mr. llill for the sitting Member. Mr. Rooxas said he appeared on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Russell, and the complaint in the petition was, that the scat had been obtained by Mr. Palmer by an apparent and colourable majority only. The case would therefore resolve itself into a scrutiny. At the election which took place on the 24th July, there werethree candidates and at the close of the poll the numbers were— For Mr. Serjeant Talfourd . Mr. Fyshe Palmer Mr. Charles Russell giving Mr. Palmer a majority of nine over Mr. Russell. This majority he (Mr. Russell) would now endeavour to strike off: The poll-books were then produced, arid put in, and the examina. lion of witnesses was proceeded with up to the time of adjournment. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, linws 7. The SPEAKER took the chair a few minutes before Four. The SPEAKER informed the House that he had received a petition complaining of an undue return for the county of Galway. The petition was ordered to be taken into conside ration on the 22d of May. Mr. CURRY brought up the report of the London Elec tion Committee, stating that Sir Matthew Wood, James Pat tison, Esq., Wm. Crawford, Esq., and G. Grote, Esq., were dul y elected, and that the petition was not frivolous or vexa tious, nor Isas the opposition thereto. OR the motion of Captain ALSAGER, the London and C roydon Railway Bill (No. 1.) was read a second time. On the motion of Mr. SHEPPARD, the Warminster and From e Road Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. CLIVE presented a petition against the tonnage duty on coals. Mr. WAKLET presented a petition from the owners and t veupiers of houses in Holborn, praying to be heard by counsel lit the bar, as to the proposed street between Holborn and the Strand. The petition was referred to the Committee on the Metropolis Improvements Bill. Mr. O. GORE brought in the Ellesmere Road Bill, which Was read a first time. Mr. W. PATTEN brought in the Grand Junction Rail way Amendment Bill, which was read a first time. Mr. WILLIAMS' presented a petition from Monmouth 4 4ainst the negro apprenticeship system. Mr. LANGDALE presented a similar petition from B everley. , Mr. HAL FORD presente d a pet i t i on f rom S t. M art i n ' s , Leiceste r in favour of the repe a l of th e Poor-laws. Mr. G. BERKELEY presented a petition from a parish In Gloucester against negro apprenticeship. Mr. CRAWFORD presented a petition from the part of London in favour of the Fishguard Harbour Bill. Mr. MONEYPENNY presented a petition from Rye Against marine insurances. Mr. BRIDGMAN presented a petition from Ennis in fa vour of municipal reform. Mr. PRoTHERoE, Mr. BEAMISII, and Mr. PEASE, presented Petitions from different places, praying for the immediate eman eipatio'n of the negroes. Mr. Sergeant JACKSON presented a petition from the . l ectors of Cork, complaining of the state of the Registration Law in Ireland. The petitioners stated that there were no means of cor rec ti ng i mproper adm i ss i ons to the reg i ster, and They prayed that the appointment of the assistant barristers should no longer be influenced by party considrations. The Learned Gentleman moved that the petition be printed, giv ing' maize that on Tuesday the 13th, he would move for a Bill tz, amend the system of Registration in Ireland. Mr. GREEN presented a petition from Lancaster, pray ing for the immediate abolition of negro apprenticeship. On the motion of Mr. PE ND A RVE S, certain returns con nected with the importation and exportation of copper, were ordered. Mr. BARING presented a petition, praying for the aboli tion of the duty on Marine Insurance. Mr. EVANS presented petitions from the Baptist congregations of Reading and Worcester, praying for the 4 bolitiqn of negro apprenticeship. - COMMISSIONS. Col, SIBTHORP moved for a continuation of the returns tit the number of Commissions issued since the last returns were b bd before the House. He expressed a hope that they would f urnish.. full er d eta il s t h an had been given by the former returns; '"'r in the case of the Commission which had been issued to in quire into the grievances of Canada, they had received no ac errunt whatever of the number of clerks employed. Now he to have the fullest information upon this as well as upon ev ery point of expenditure. Mr. BARING said that he had no objection to the produc `loll of the returns moved for by the Hon. and Gallant officer. Mr. P. THOMSON presented a p e tition from Manehes .-r3 prayi ng t h at t h e system of negro apprenticeship mi g ht "rtninat e on the Ist of August next. The Hon Member also presented a pet i t i on f rom t h e Ch am b er o f Commerce of Man chester in favour of the Grand Junction Railway Bill. Mr.WILLIAM DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Ye North Riding of the County of York against the Bonn nary Bill. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from a surveyor in Is _ r e dford-square, complaining of the law of Debtor and t ki editor, and praying for its alteration:—also petitions from c r,re Liv er p oo l W or ki ng Men's Association, and from the "oeiety of Operative Carpenters and Mechanics of Dumfries, °raying for a mitigation of the sentence of the Glasgow Cot rl, Spinners. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from 7_, Worki ng -M an i n Sh ore ditch, stating that he had an i diot daughter, whom he was desirous of placing in'some lie institution, but they would not receive her either in the W orkhouse or in Bartholomew Hospital, and that when he ;',ent to w or k h e was o bliged to chain her up till his return. T he Hon. Member trusted that the House would allow the Petition to be referred to the Poor-law Committee, which he F"sidered the proper tribunal to take merits of the petition into consideration.—Referred to the Poor-law Committee. Lord CLEMENTS p re sented a petition from poor fisher- Men of L e i tr i m , Sli go , and Donegal, praying that the indul gence Acts of former Sessions might not be abrogated. un the motion of Mr. P. THOMSON, the different Orders t ef the Day were read, for the purpose of postponing them to day. ~)\k),)&- -N.\)-)il'A-0 No. 14,192. 21 .I WITH WHICH THE " TRUE SUN" IS NOW INCORPORATED. ADJOURNED DEBATE. CENSURE ON MINISTERS. The Order of the Day having been read for resuming the adjourned debate, Mr. LEADER rose to offer a few observations on the sub ject. He could assure the House he would detain them but a few minutes, because from the pain he was suffering, he could not, even if he were disposed, address the House for any lengthened period. The main question brought forward by his Hon. Friend had been entirely set aside, and the debate had been narrowed to a discussion upon the late revolt, and the causes which had led to it, and the conduct of the Government, as stated in the amendment of the Noble Lord. The great question of the difficulties in which the colonies were at present involved, and the inaptitude of the Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial Department, had been put entirely aside, in order that the debate might be come a mere party question, and that there might be a discussion—not whether the colonies were well or ill governed —not whether the colonial policy was well or ill administered by the Government—but whether the Gentlemen now on the Treasury bench should keep their places, or make way for Gentlemen opposite. And it was quite right that a Minister (Lord Palmerston), who had not been out of office for the last quarter of a century—( Laughter)—should answer, or attempt to answer his Hon. Friend, for the Noble Lord had utterly failed so to do. It was curious to observe the error ieto which the Noble Lord had fallen with respect to the manner in which the Hon. Bart. ( Sir W. Molesworth) meant to introduce the question. The Noble Lord appeared to have supposed that the Hon. Baronet was gcing to make a violent democra tic speech, and to confine his notice of the Colonial-office to the mal-administration of Canadian affairs alone. Accord ingly, the Noble Lord came down to the House fully prepared to defend the present policy with respect to Canada, but totally unprepared to answer the charges which were brought against the Government with regard to the other colonies.—(Hear, hear.) He confessed that it was a matter of surprise to him that the Noble Lord should have taken credit to the Government for the manner in which the affairs of Canada had been administered.—( Hear, hear.) It did appear to him that it required a long expe rience of office and something of the brazen face which one acquired by a familiar acquaintance with it— ( Hear, hear, and laughter)—to enable the Noble Lord to make the avowal which be did, of the gratification which he felt at having a share in the misgovernment of Ca nada.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had been pleased to taunt his Hon. Friend with having failed to make out a case in support of his motion. Now he contended that the failure was entirely on the side of the Noble Lord, for he had not succeeded in answering one single point in the speech of his Honourable Friend. The Noble Lord was pleased to say that this was an unjust and ungenerous attack. It seemed to him ( Mr. Leader) that this was a strange charge to bring against an Hon. Member-- that his course had been ungenerous. As a public man he had made a statement in his public capacity against a Minister of the Crown, for having badly and negligently attended to his duty. If there was any thing ungenerous in such conduct he (Mr. Leader) was at a loss to understand how any Minister could be responsible to the House.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") It seemed to him that the Ministers would have a complete sinecure if they might be negligent in the management of their department, and yet be screened from any charge, because of its being ungenerous. As to its being unconstitutional, he need not weary the House with precedents, for every Gentleman must be aware of them. But whether there were precedents or not, the case was one of such urgency, that the country would decide whether his Hon. Friend was justified in bringing forward his statement, showing the great difficulty in which our Colonial Empire was placed ; and clearly showing, from the sins of omission and commission of the Noble Lord, that he was not the fittest man in the country, or rather that he was the most unfit Minister, that could be placed there to grapple with the difficulties which at present me naced almost every one of our colonial possessions. The Noble Lord said he was surprised at the quarter from which the attack came. He said he should not have been sur prised at the Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel), or the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire (Lord Stan ley), bringing forward such a motion. But to be attacked by Members who had acted with them, who profess to be more liberal than they themselves were, was most strange. Now it appeared to him that they, of all others, were the persons most called upon to attack the Government, when they considered they ought to be attacked, because, for some time past they had trusted the Government—they had supported it—they had believed its liberal pro fessions ; and now, when they found themselves de ceived, they were imperatively called upon to discharge their duty, by stating that they no longer placed the confidence in the Government they had hitherto reposed. —( Opposition cheers.) The Noble Lord had referred to a meeting at Bodmin in October last, and had tried to fix upon his Hon. Friend a charge of inconsistency, for having then said something in favour of the Government, and now at tacking them. There really was in the whole of the Noble Lord's statement something that savoured strongly of the Foreign Office—there was a great deal of diplomatic sup pression of facts in that statement.—(Hear, and a laugh.) And then by way, he presumed, of raising a laugh at his ( Mr. Leader's) expense, he said that the Hon. Member for Westminster had returned thanks on the pert of her Majesty's Ministers. He was sorry to intrude upon the House in a matter so purely personal ; but as the Noble Lord had intro duced the subject he could not avoid referring to it, and he must add, that the Noble Lord in his statement had very much misquoted what had occurred. The fact was that the Chair man, without communicating with him ( Mr. Leader), proposed the health of her Majesty's Ministers, so long as they studied the interests of the people ; and he said he would couple with it what he believed to be a fair coupling--the Reformers of Westminster, that being the place where they held their sittings, and he then gave her Majesty's Ministers so long as they - studied the interests of the Reformers of Great Britain. He (Mr. Leader) felt called on to return thanks for the Reformers of Westminster ; and when be considered that at the late election several of her Majesty's Ministers had done him the honour of voting for him—(Loud cries of "Hear, hear," from the Opposi sition benches)—he really thought that there would be some thing very ungracious in not returning thanks to the toast. That would be casting them off without any trial, be cause they had had no trial under a new reign, and there fore it was he stated at the meeting that he had no thing to do with the Ministers—that he was delighted to return thanks for the Reformers of Westminster— but that with respect to Ministers he should pursue the same course he had always done, and that whenever he found that supporting the Ministers was on one side, and his principles on the other, he should then sacrifice the Ministers to his principles. Was that, he would ask, supporting Ministers ?—( Cheers. ) But supposing that he had supported them, had not circum stanees taken place since that time that would justify him in changing his opinion? He should like to know whether Ministers had forgotten the declaration of the Noble Lord the Member fur Stroud, that no reform was necessary? Did they not recol lect the manner in which they had hurried through the Civil List—a Civil List, he would venture to say, more extravagant than had ever vet been brought forward ? His lion. Friend the Member for Kilkenny reminded him that since that time the suspension of the Canadian Constitution took place. The Noble Lord in referring to the meeting, wished, he supposed, to bring a charge of inconsistency against the Radicals. If such was the case, in his opinion, it was a most strange charge to come from him as a Minister.—( Hear, hear.) Then in def en di ng the Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial Department, the Noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs seemed surprised that the Colonial Department had been chosen as the object of attack. Now, it seemed to him (Mr. Leader) that there was something to justify that surprise.—( Hear, hear.) He thought there were many matters connected with the ad ministration of Foreign affairs which would not give satisfac tion to the country. He believed the Noble Lord's depart. ment was open to attack. Perhaps the hint would not be thrown away, and perhaps Gentlemen who felt an interest in foreign affairs would give the Noble Lord an opportunity of vindicating his conduct.—( Hear, and a laugh.) In defend ing his Noble Colleague, the Noble Lord did not refute the statements made by his lion. Friend, but said Lord Glenelg was a man of an amiable disposition, a man of pious character, a man of great acquirements, and a man for whom he had a very great regard indeed. That might be all very well . ; but it was no answer to the statement made by his Hon. Friend. Lord Glenelg was charged by his Hon. Friend with having badly administered the Colonial Government. The an swer to that had been that Lord Glenelg was a most amiable and accomplished man in, private life. It might be all very well for the purpose of the Noble Lord to put the matter in the way he had ; but his Honourable Friend had never made a charge against L or d Gl e n e lg because the system was bad—.h e had never charged him with having brought on the Colonies the evils that existed before he came into office—all his Hon. Friend stated was this,which was not only unanswered but was unanswerable, because it was strictly true, namely that Lord Glenelg had not administered with decision, firmness, or activity that Colonial system, whether good or bad, which he was called on by the duty of his office to administer.—( Hear , hear.) Last of all, the Noble Lord said, censider what would be the result of his Hon. Friend suc ceeding in his motion, that the country would have the great misfortune to loso their services, and there would be the ter rible evil of the anti-Reformers coming into power! — (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Leader) confessed he was not very much frightened by that prospect, for it was his firm belief that there was very little difference indeed between the present Ministers and any Tory Ministers which might succeed them. —( Hear.) Moreover, it was his belief the country would not lose by the change ; and he would state his reasons for that belief. At present they had a Government acting on Tory principles.—(Cries of " No, no.") Whatever their professions might be, lie maintained that they were acting on Tory principles—( Hear, hear) —and what was more important, controlled by a very powerful Tory opposition. —( Hear, hear.) If the Gentlemen opposite were in power they would then indeed have a Government acting on Tory principles; but they would have a liberal, vigilant opposition to control them, and the country would LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 8, 1838. be in as good a position one way or the ether. He did not mean to say that that was the position of the House that he should like to see ; but still the prospect held out by the Noble Lord to deter the House from proceeding with the original motion was not so gloomy as he would have Hon. Members to believe. He should now make a few observa tions in reference to the amendment moved by the Noble Lord. It seemed that the Noble Lord was induced from personal motives to abstain from supporting the motion of his Hon. Friend. It seemed to him that the original motion and the amendment would have the same effect to blame the Govern ment, in consequence of their colonial affairs ; and conse quently, of course, to blame the Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial Department—( Hear, hear)— but it seemed that such was the personal friendship of the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool for the Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial Department, that he thought it better that it should be declared that the affairs of the colo nies had been badly administered or neglected, rather than his personal friend should be subjected to any pain, or any thing in the shape of censure pronounced by that House. That might be very well for the Noble Lord, but it did not seem to him ( Mr. Leader) to he the way in which a public man ought to view public matters. He thought that private friendship should give way to public duty. He presumed the Noble Lord thought it would be impossible for him ( Mr. Leader) or any person on his side of the House to vote for the amendment. Now he entirely concurred in the main object of the amendment, which was to censure the Government for their bad administration of the Colonial Affairs ; but he could not concur with the preamble of the amendment. With that part of it which threw a slur upon and branded in very harsh terms the unfortunate Canadians, who from a series of misgovernment had been driven into a state of revolt, .hc, was ready to confess that they had been very imprudent and rash, but they had been deluded by this country, and if they had succeeded as the Americans had succeeded, they would have mixed up the question with any thing- approaching to party politics. At the time Mr. Burke laid the ground-work of a general reform in the Government of the colonies, did he endeavour, by criminating any particular individual, to make converts to his general principle of reform ?—had he mixed it up with party politics ?—and was not his Honour able Friend taking the most likely means to enlist all the prejudices of the House on the one side or the other? He agreed with his Honourable Friend in his ge neral remarks on the administration of some of their prin cipal Colonies ; but if he (Mr. W.) wanted to in troduce such a plan, would he commence by criminating the Administration—would he not rather attack the system, and make his observations as general as possible, in order to have both sides of the House to concur with him ? On these grounds, he could not agree with his Honourable Friend the Member for Leeds. It behoved his Honourable Friend, and the party with whom he acted, if party they might be called, so to shape his motion as not to make it the subject of an imputation on any individual. 'On these grounds it was impossible for him to concur with the motion of the Hon. Baronet the Member for Leeds. He had stated that, with respect to him (Mr. W.) that was not the fact. He said that he had advocated the principle that this country would be better without Colonies. That was not the case; he was an advocate for Colonies, hut what he had said was, that when Colonies had grown up from in fancy to manhood, it would be impossible to treat them as children. He would now come to the amendment of the Noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool, and would state the grounds on which he felt it to be his duty to oppose that amend ment. Now, what was the effect of that amendment? Why, in the very first part of it there was an approximation to the resolu tions that were introduced in that House on the 16th of January by the Noble Lord, the Leader of that House. He found in that amendment a complete affirma tion of all the principles of those resolutions, and the only difference was the manner in which those principles were carried out.—( Cheers.) How, therefore, could he who had resisted the principles laid down in those resolutions adopt an amendment which virtually contained them ? He should therefore vote against the resolution of the Hon. Baronet, and the amendment of the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool. Mr. LITTON would not have presumed to trespass on the attention of the House if it had not been for the assertion made by the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who opened the debate on behalf of the Government, and by the Honourable Member for Marylebone, with respect to the state of Ireland.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") He thought that as an Irish Member he would not be doing his duty if he did not protest against that statement, and if he suffered it to pass uncontradicted, and to go forth to English men. It had been stated by this Noble Lord and this Hon. Gentleman—first, that Ireland was now in a tranquil state, and next, that that tranquillity was owing to the pre sent Government, and would be likely to be destroyed by the coming in of a Conservative Government. He wholly denied the state of Ireland deserved the epithet of tranquillity—he wholly denied it was in a state to justify that description. On the contrary, he thought wherever the law was sought to be enforced it had been met with resistance and violence, and that it was only where combination and force had been yielded to by compulsion that the districts in Ireland were tranquil.—( Hear, hear.) He admitted there was a certain portion of Ireland where the rights of the landlord, and the rights of the clergy, and the rights of the voter, to exercise their just privileges, had been successfully put down ; he ad mitted that fears, and terror, and threat had had the effect of preventing the landlord from exercising his fair prerogative over his tenant, of preventing the clergyman from insisting on his due rights, and of preventing the voter from exer cising the fair privilege of his elective franchise—where that had been successful, and where the fear and terror of injury to life and property had prevented the exercise of their just rights. If that were to be called tranquillity he admitted that those districts were tranquil. But he did assent with a confidence which an intimate knowledge of the fact enabled him to assume, that wheresoever the land lord in the southern and western parts of Ireland sought to exercise his rights as between himself and his tenant— where for one tenant he presumed to substitute another—that both the life and property of the landlord and the substituted tenant were made the subject of attack. He asserted that where the Clergy insisted on their rights they were met by attacks, by bloodshed, and assassination ; and he also asserted there were many cases where the voters, exercising their fair privilege of voting, had been the subject of animadversion, of threat, of terror, of annoyance, and of actual injury. If that were so, could the country in which those things existed be called tranquil ? Was it to be said that Ireland was tranquil, where, if a man but exercised his vote, as was done by Mr. Guinnes, one of the first and most liberal merchants of Dublin—a gentleman who :had ever supported Liberal principles—who supported the Catholic claims—and who was at one time looked to for the Liberal candidate : was it to be said that when he ex ercised his fair right of voting against the sitting Members for Dublin, his property was to be attacked in open day, and a combination to be entered into to deprive him of his busi ness ? And yet this had been so. He should certainly not go upon this subject, which to a certain extent might be called a collateral one, into minute facts; but it was per fectly well known that if terror and threat were yielded to, there was peace. But if the rights of property were insisted upon, there was nothing but threats and terror with loss of property and loss of life. It had been said that the present Government of Ireland had pursued a policy tending to tranquillize that unhappy country, To that proposition also he gave his direct dissent. Their partial conduct had brought on them the greatest possible obloquy. They were considered to be in the power, and under the direction of, one set of men, or rather of one man ofstrong political bias, so that all they did appeared to be done under his direction.—( Hear, hear.) There was, consequently, no t preservation of life or property of one pa r ti cu l ar class of her Majesty's subjects in that country, and he attributed to the vacillating way in which the affairs of that country were administered, and to the fact of the Government of that country yielding to the dictation of one man, and the want of power in itself to take any bold eters, the evils which Ireland laboured tinder. It was asked, would the sub stitution of a Conservative Government remedy those evils? It was brought in upon this debate as one of the ele ments of the case, to induce Members on both sides of the House to refuse their support to the Noble Lord's amendment, because, however deserving of censure her Majesty's Ministers might be, a vote of censure being passed upon them might shake their Government, and cause a Con servative Government to be substituted in Ireland in lieu of them. He (Mr. Litton) believed it would he for th e b ene fi t o f Ire land that the Go vernment of that country should be changed.— „ Question,"" Chair," and" Hear," from the Opposi tion.) What benefit had the Government of Ireland confered upon t h e 99-100ths of the people of Ireland ? Political aspirants had obtained places—pots of honour and profit conferred— but had the condition of the lower classes been improved ? Had they been in any way benefited by the present Govern ment ? On the contrary. had they not been brought into the arena of political dispute? Had not their small earnings been the exigencies of th ose, who, for their own l ess ened to supply selfish purpose s, had made them th e i r too l s and slaves?— ( Hear, hear , from the O pp osition. ) A Conservati ve Govern ment would confer great benefits upon Ireland. A Conservative Government would disdain to be dictated to by any set of men ; but would de justice to all classes of Her Majesty's subjects. And he thotight that it would be fortunate for the country if the te,ult of the present motion was to substitute for the present Ministry, a faithful, bold, and manly government in Ireland. Mr. DUNLOP said he would not follow the Hon. Gen tleman, who had just sat down, through the Irish debate which he had endeavoured to introduce.—( Hear, hear.) The I - louse was pledged by many divisions upon most important subjects, to a certain line of policy in regard to Ireland, contrary to that which Hon. Gentlemen opposite advocated.—( Hear.) One of the charges against the present Administration was, that they had been slow iu sending forces to replace those which had been taken from Nova Scotia.--( Hear. ) He was of opinion that the presence of an additional body of troops in Nova Scotia would not have been productive of any advantage to this country. He did not go the length of saying that the presence of a large body of ts'oops in Lower Canada might not have prevented the insurrection ; but this was not the question, for it appeared by the papers which had been laid upon the table of that House, that there were no grounds to justify the Government in sending additional troops to Canada. He differed from the Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool when he said that it was a disadvantage to the Government to be obliged to accept the assistance of volunteers. So far was he from thinking that to be the case, that lie was of opinion it would show the world that they did not seek to main tain the Constitution, or to vindicate the powers of the law, by an overwhelming body of troops, but that they preferred relying on the loyalty and attachment of the Colonists. lie thought the Government had acted wisely in not raising any hostile feeling either in Canada or the United States, by sending a large body of troops to do that which had been as well effected without them. He thought that the Government had gained a very great point by the manner in which they had acted. They had shown that the strength of the Crown was more securely based on the affections than the fears of the people.—( Hear, hear.) It was because lie wished to maintain the Administration that he had always acted on this principle, and because he did not think that any grounds had been shown for the charges of neglect and culpability, that he refused to assent to the motion of the Noble Lord. Sir F. 'TRENCH totally differed from the lion. Gentle man who had just sat dawn, for lie thought that volunteers were not the best to put down a revolt or insurrection. Dis sensions were sown by such an attempt, passions of another description entered into the contest, and that which could be done with better effect by the troops of the line would be done with mischievous effect by volunteers. The Hon. Gentleman regretted that this should be made an Irish debate. He ( Sir F. Trench) did not intend to mention Ireland, further than to express his surprise at what fell from the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Foreign Department. He was pleased in a sneering way to say that a Conser vative Government might administer the affairs of Ca nada, but what would they do in Ireland ? The inference been held up as the Americans had been, as patriots. He could not agree to brand them with harsh names, because they had not succeeded. He was sorry there had been any revolt in Canada, but ho could not consent, now that they had been de feated, to add insult to the miseries they had suffered. For that reason, it would be utterly impossible for him to vote for the amendment of the Noble Lord. What ever might be the result of the motion or of the amendment, one good would be effected by the conduct of his Honourable Friend the Member for Leeds, and that was, that the attention of the country would be called to the subject of our vast colonial empire to con sider the difficulties, and to insist that the affairs of it should be better administered for the future. If Members on either side of the House were to look into the subject calmly and dispassionately, without reference to any party feeling, they would see that at no distant period the country ought to be grateful to his Hon. Friend for having called their attention to the subject of colonial affairs, and having directed the attention of the people to the subject, which unfortunately caused no great interest in the country at present. Mr. HOBHOUSE then addressed the House—we un derstood him to say for the first time—but in so low a tone of voice that we could not,' without difficulty, collect the purport of what he said. We believe he intimated that he could not vote for the original motion or the amendment. It had been said that an attack ought to have been made upon the chief of the Foreign De partment. But there was a good reason why that course should not be taken. The head of that department was in that House, while the Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial Office was not able to defend himself there except by means of subordinates. There appeared to him to be a most material difference be tween the spirit and policy which governed the actions of Gentlemen at that, and Gentlemen at the other side of the House. It might be that they agreed on some things which were of minor consideration, but on all questions of importance there was a wide ground of distinction between them. Gentlemen at his side of the House had not shown themselves the sup porters and advocates of a system of misgovernment in Ireland. —(llear, hear.) They had not endeavoured to coun teract the progress of civil and religious liberty.—( Hear. ) They had been told by the Hon. Member that he would not address himself to the unconstitutional character of the proceedings in Canada. He had another and better reason for this, for he knew there was not a man in that House who did not believe that the policy pursued by her Majesty's Ministers was constitutional, and that the first infraction of the ConsCtution proceeded from the rebels themselves.—( Hear.) In the former debates which took place on this question he had heard it said that there was an analogy between the cha racters of the Imperial and Colonial Legislatures, and that what was done by one might be done by the other. By the same parity of reasoning he contended that the first viola tion of the Constitution was on the part of the Canadians themselves, for if they were to 'proceed in all cases by ana logy, his Mon. Friend ought to take all its consequences. For what purpose was the right of withholding the supplies granted to the Colonial Legislature? That right, he freely admitted, was not granted so much for the purpose of pre venting maladministration as to enable the House of Assembly to obtain a redress of their grievances, by controlling the other branches of the Legislature. Now the Canadians were perfectly right in attempting to influence their own Legislature, but not in attempting to control or dic tate to the Imperial Parliament. They had attempted to apply the influence which they possessed to a branch of the Legislature over which they had no control whatever. He would pa rs over the observations made by his Hon. Friend on this point, but he thought he had said sufficient to convince the House that there was an essential difference between an attempt on the part of the Canadians to control the Colonial Legislature and to dictate to that House. He would now proceed to address himself to the motion of the Noble Lord opposite. He was not disposed to give his assent to the proposal of the Hon. Member for Leeds. It appeared to him that any pro posal more tending to discourage a Colonial Minister, more tending to encourage the rebels in Canada—( Hear)—more calculated to bring about that state of things they were anxious not to defend, could not have been enunciated. The Noble Lord had taken stronger ground than the Hon. Baronet had done. But when he complained of the Ministers not sending troops to America, he was perfectly astonished, because history showed that collisions had generally taken place in the presence of the troops themselves. This was the case at Boston during the American war of independence. It had not beets stated that, in the present intance, evil conseque nces had resulted from the absence of troops—they did not know that the presence of troops might not sooner have promoted the insurrection.—((lear, hear, hear.) It was said that the inst. uctions of the Government, were fluctuating and unsteady; )tit it was not by unsteady operations of the Government, but the resolutions which wore taken in the last year, which pro. rooted the insurrection.—( Hear.) It seemed to bins ( Mr. that there was an anxicus desire to prevent the effusion of blood—( Cheers)—a desire which lion. Gentlemen oppo site had not participated in, for every men recollected the ffusion of blood which took place during the different periods when they were in power.—( Hear, hear, en d cheers.) He had no doubt that Hon. Members opposite would have given troops, and plenty of troops, and he was quite certain that the colony would then have been in a state which no man could contemplate without horror. But he ( Mr. II.) was very much convinced, by the arguments of the Gentleman who spoke last in the debate last night. Ile showed that there was no demand for troops till September, 1837. Arid he showed that it - would have beets at that time impos siblc fur the troops to enter the St. Lawrence. He was not willing to trouble the House at much length.—( Hear. ) He thanked the House for the indulgence which it had extended to him already, and upon which he was unwilling to trespass. Although the rebellion was now partially—indeed be might say totally—put down, there was yet a possibility of its being renewed, and the conduct of Gentlemen opposite was calculated to provoke it.--( Hear, from the Ministerial benches.) When the resolutions respecting Canada, were proposed by the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department, an amendment was proposed by a Right Hon. Gentleman Oppo site, and that amendment was received with great indulgence by that (the Ministerial side) of the House.—( Ironical cheers from the Tory benches.) He was rejoiced at that. ( Renewed Tory Cheers.) Gentlemen might cheer, but he was no partisan of the Government. He was an independent Member, but he thought that the Government was right in consideration of the importance of unanimity i n the House at such a crisis in the affairs of the colony. He thought that Honourable Gentlemen opposite ought not now to disturb that unanimity for the chance of put ting themselves in office. If unfortunately they succeeded, what would be the consequence? They would fan the expir ing flame of rebellion, and as they would be embarrassed by the opposition of Gentlemen now on that side of the House, they would give encouragement by their division to the hopes of the rebels, and the revolt might be renewed and terminate in tarnishing the glory of this empire. He did hope that the amendment of his Noble Friend would be withdrawn, and that there would be some unanimity on the present occasion—that both the lion. Gentlemen would reserve their party contentions, and their party animo sities, till a period when they could be indulged in without any evil results. He had alluded already to the course pursued in America, and he would now conclude by reciting to the Lion. Gentlemen on the other side of the House what had been said by a great writer of Lord Camden and Mr. Pitt,. afterwards Earl of Chatham—men far greater than themselves—( Hear and a laugh)--" That while they meant no more than the ruin of a Minister, they had in fact divided one half of the empire from the other." The Hon. Member concluded by thanking the House for its indulgence. Mr. WAR BURTON had no intention of going over the question of the state of the colonies, but merely wished to state the grounds upon which he would give his vote upon the question before the House. And first, with respect to the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Leeds. He was sure that many Hon. Members on that and the other side of the House—many Whigs, Tories, and Radicals, were of opinion that the present constitution of the Colonial Office was not adequate to the proper administration of the affairs of their vast Colonial Empire.—( Hear.) But if his Hon. Friend had intended to move for a general reform in the management of colonial affairs, he could no t h ave ta k en a cause lss likely to be effective. --(Hear, hear.) He should not have __ :; , ,,- ;; i''',•,,t,f) fr ' - ' _.___ k—t As ill t i \ xs.sesys6.• c,K ........--„ di5..... # -f -... , . 1 . 1 ,.. ....,...!.. ..t. st.. k-..- . 4 1.A ., ...4‘ t - Tfl i rWif _ ~- , __., , ~,.,, ~ ) ...,, -_ --,.. , , -•.-: A -0 i.. ‘:.' ~ ‘---,,,,, - .l' • _ --- 7 ------,,, , _ . ~ , it ( . 1 : ;, ~ , , 4 ~/..) ~1-. _ -- —.-:, 1;')-!' j ) 7 ::.,, ( \\:,* , AA' /.,, . ' o ''''. :\r . -"Q . - ,tin 'V ' t , S' ~ c'.:' ' ' / Y., ~-. 4( -. 1 1 ,!;;S. 4 ' / - - 0 -÷ ; , / ,4,• 4 ' .r . "" 4 iii , . i0 .', 2..,- 41 . , / / . 1./- , •xt., ,; '4 /-) T. ~' ' • 04 , )))))`)PIII 14 i Ai 01 T .:, ,' V''‘ s- -,.---L -\: ~, -:i' '-, i, b . I It, • .....1., ~, ', IAIII ) i K . .• tit , . i .)l- , -,, - , ..4 n •. , -- /q/// , ',/ , .3.- ; :- .: ; e0 . ''' , 04 , ' L r yip,7 PRICE sd. Criminal Code, upon a corrupt ParHa -Lary _.tion, which had been replaced in the last seven years by loyalty, obedience, and unanimity, through the measures of a Liberal Administration. The agitation caused by the recession of the Noble Lord, the IllembN . for North Lancashire, and Sir .James Graham, from the Ministry, had hardly time to subside, when the sudden immigration of the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth into office gave rise to fresh excitement. Parties were then more equally balanced ; but, as it had been foreseen, the Tories were not able to retain their places long. A reforming Government succeeded, and pursued its course calmly and steadily, but they were exposed to attack from their own supporters, for not going to the lengths which they wished, and he thought it ungenerous of Hon. Members opposite to reproach the Government for stopping short of their demands. They had arrived at a state of comparative calmness, how ever, when his late Majesty's decease caused a dissolution of Parliament, and a majority of Whigs was returned, but not sufficiently decisive to keep down the hopes of the Right lion. Baronet and his party. Hence they were animated by feel ings of disappointed, yet not hopeless ambition—hence they had the Spottiswoode subscription—( Hear)—hence the deci sions of the Election Committees.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear," frog: the Opposition Benches.) He could understand that cheer; and for his own part he would say that he deplored any decisions, conic from what side of the House they might, that were not founded ifl justice and fairness.—(Cheers.) Who were they who now wanted to plunge the country into embarrassment and confusion? It was the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth, and the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire, who sought to ride in on the motion of the Honourable Baronet the Member for Leeds, and to upset the present Government.—( Hear.) What was their object ? To huddle together an Administration of any sort, and then to trust to their luck at the elections. The Hon. Baronet could not control his followers, and if he could so little control them now, how much less would he be able to do so when they came fres. l ,l from the election and in the moment of victory, and when he had refused the sweets of office, as he must do, to three-fourths of his impatient fol lowers—( Laughter)—how would they recon6. l e the contradic tory pledges they had given on the hustings—hOr would they complain of unfulfilled promises—how would he be ane to con trol them ? He knew that it would be impossible for lino to do so. Were it not for the palpable evil of carrying the measure, he (Mr. Rich) should rejoice to see it carried. It would then be seen how great was the unanimity of the Honourable Gentlemen opposite. They would have the Honourable Member for the University of Oxford presenting petitions against the Catholic Emancipation Bill, founding a motion thereon, and applying to the leader cf his party to support that measure. Then they would have the Hon. and Learned Member the Recorder for Dublin introducing a motion for circulating mutilated copies of the Scriptures, and as soon as he carried that motion, he would carry on his success by asking the Noble Lord to restore the hierarchy of Ireland which he had so unmercifully cut down—( Hear, hear),—and in so doing he would be supported by many of the Orange Members on his side of the House. How would the Right Honourable Baronet be able to controul these followers ? He would not dwell on any more of these glaring inconsis teneies.—(Cries of " the Poor-laws.") How would some of these Honourable Members agree on the Poor Law Amend ment Act—that measure, which was one of the most important ever propounded ? How would they keep down the exuberance of those parties who were re turned on the ground of violently exclaiming against that Act as the most abominable that ever disgraced the country ? How would they support the Right Hon. Baronet ?—(Cheers.) ' \Vhat would be the state of Ireland if the gentlemen oppo:ite should come into office?—(Cheers from the Ministerial Benches.) For the last two years Ireland had tasted some thing of the sweets of peace, and her hopes bad been raised high, although they had not yet been realized, but the carry ing of this resolution would dash the cup from her lips, and drive her into that state of madness in which the maniac seeks his own ruin for the purpose of perpetrating that of an oppressor. But there was a band of Reformers in that House, who despite of minor differences, would unite to save the supporters of the resolution from the evils which they would bring upon themselves, and to save Ireland from the ruin which their perverse course would entail upon Ireland. It was not for him to reproach those Reformers, but ho en treated them to imitate the example which had been set them on the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, and to adopt the moderation and union of men who were as zealous in the cause of Reform as they themselves were. The division upon this question would show the policy of those Conservatives who preached moderation, and practised agitation—who were desi , ous of driving the country into a series of dissolutions, to obtain a temporary possession of office. ( Hear, from the Tories. ) They could not deny that dissolution must be the result of carrying either the resolution or the amendment ; but did they think that they would be able to resist Reform or to crush the Irish people—did they think they could affright the people from their purpose by calling up the ghosts of Old Sarum, and whirling round the weathercock of Westminster ?—( Great laughter and cheers.) Mr. PR Ali D said the speech of the Hon. Member did not r: quire much reply, as it shad touched upon a variety of topics in no way connected with the question. The Hon. Member had accused the Noble Lord (Sandon) with coming down to the House with a cut-and-dry amend ment - - would he have the Noble Lord come down with an impromptu amendment on such an occasion -4 Hear, hear.) He (Mr. I'reed) was so favourable to cut-and-dry amendments, that he could extend his toleration even to cut-and-dry speeches__ (Hear, hear, snd laughter.) He (Mr. Praed) agreed with almost every word the Hon. Baronet bad said. Respecting the government of the colonies—their mismanagement—their importance, the Hon. Baronet had said much that was just, and wise, and true. With respect to their existing state, he had said much that at least deserved the attention of any Government. He thought the motion of the Hon. Baronet had not been fairly dealt with by some of the Hon. Members who had at tempted to answer him. The Noble Lord the Secretary at War, had asked him was it fair to go into the state of the Colonial Government, when the Hon. Baronet had admitted that the misgovernment existed long before the Administration of Lord Glenelg. That was not the object of the Hon. Bart. He wanted to show that the difficulties and danger of their position was such that it ought not to be entrusted to incompe tent hands. The Hon. Member for Bridport had accused the Hon. Baronet of condemning our Colonial system of Govern ment, while be attacked an individual, and not the system. The Hon. Baronet's argument, hoivever, was not that the system was bad, but that it bad been entrusted to incom petent hands, and he called upon the House to remove him —( Cheers.) With respect to the colony of New South Wales the Noble Lord's answer had not been so conclusive as it was considered. The Act for the Government of that co lony had expired three years ago, without any attempt having been made to revive it until the Hon. Baronet had placed his motion on the paper. There was no more conclusive proof could be (riven pf the incompetency of Lord Glenelg than was exhibited in his correspondence with respect to Canada. He should vote for the amendment of the Noble Lord, although he would have no objection to support the mo tion. —( Hear, hear.) The motion was not of a personal nature, and ho would remind the House that when Lord Sandwich's conduct was brought forward the same way by Mr. Fox, nothing of a personal nature was imputed to him, and Lord North at once admitted that it was an attack on the Administration. The amendment of the Noble Lord was of a distinct character, and on that account he should pr'efer to vote for it—it left nothing to be understood and it included the whole Administration within its scope. It had been alleged that the object of the Amendment was to turn out the present Administration in order that his (Mr, P.'s) party might take their places ; but the Hon. Member for Bridport had stated that the preamble of the amendment rendered it impossible for him to vote for it. That was a proof that their object was not to catch stray votes. He was sur nrised to find that the Noble Lord had setempted to justify the rebellion which had lately taken place in Canada. It was aci,,:itted that up to 1828 the whole course of the po li cy o f t his ,„euntry towards Canada was of the most ben:- ficent description. .N 2 w, be could advert to the evidence or Mr. Roebuck as to the sta%,..' of Canada up to 1822. In that year, Mr. • Roebuck, who eas no: then the paid advocate of the Canadians, but an independent :11e:"ber of the House, pub lished a design for the union of the tW: Canadas.—[The Hon. Member here real an extract from one or !tie Pamphlets by Mr. Roebuck, in-which he praised the cour“i p :lrsued br the Government with respect to Canada.] In his Mr. P.'s) opinion, the evils of Canada were of a much more recent date than Honourable Members imagined, He thought that they were referable to that recent. period which bad been adverted to in the course of the debate, but those evils ought in his opinion to have been foreseen by the existing Government. lie agreed with an lion. Baronet, who addressed the House late !4.st night, that it was hard to impute the evils under which Canada laboured to Lord Glenelg previous to his being in office, but that was the very reason why it had become a ground of complaint that Mi nisters lied not been more watchful. Why. he would ask, did they wait 6;1 the rebellion broke out ? Why were steps pot taken to put an end to it before ? It had been said that Lord Glenelg had shown foresight ; but had Lord Gosford done so ? Why, the whole of his correspondence showed directly the reverse.—( Hear' hear, hear.) That Noble Lord went out to Canada with a full knowledge that the Government at home were prepared upon a considerable scale to alter the Legislative Council ; but that Noble Lord, instead of apply, ing the remedies he had in his power, for the purpose of re. modelling the Legislative Council, had from time to time delayed the adoption of that course, upon the pretext that there would be a difficulty to find persons to sit in the Legis lative Council. In the month of June, one month after, Lord tilitoacthleisatderbe(eAnir.ulsieodbitiohaissee;e%isihoog saidby t t h h e at H t o h n e . G M o e v m e r b a e m r e f i o i t r Gosford began to quake. H e was aston i s h e d at t h e argument u d d ii ~e i hn e t i yn o itai r lde oLsnollide h o o s n lo r o d i t n o i n g u s e t h e language Canadian f G th o e . had acted admir a bly i n sen di ng out no troops to C anada ; but three cour. - ,es to pursue in reference e.aait'sitil it n hi t en ? . v to the present motion—one was to vote - the direct negative of poe fsoirtiotimwdtiloch:aattheo;twahnoitleheragwreaesd affirm teas affirm ril t p h o e s i p b r l the proposition, which e nt er t a i n i ng t h e op i n i ons he did, it t with e ly ver t ; word of it, would not be satisfactory ; and the third was to suggest an amendment which would have the effect of putting- forward their views so distinctly as to avoid the possibility of being mis-understood. 110 I:new the course which the Gcntl,:men on the ether aide the Howe would take. They would propose that the words proposed to bc! left out by the ancient do s t an d part of the question, and upon that the f r i en d s o f the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Leeds, disapproving of the preamblb of the amendment, would be compelled to vote with the Government. The Opposition side of the House had been taunted sith collision, hut let Honourable Members take the list of votes after this; vote was taken, and then they would see where, he would not say the disgraceful but the artful, ?volition was.--( Cheers. ) Sir G. GRE Y wail beicre he addr4.ssed himself to the ob. servati.ms of the Hon. Member who had just sat do n, he would upon a sanguinay mentary represental which he ( Sir F. Trench) drew from it was this—that the Noble Lord's colleagues had put Ireland into such a situation that nobody could govern that country but themselves. This view of the case was more condemnatory of the Government than anything that could be offered to convey censure on a2e Government. If Ireland was in such a state as to render it difficult to be governed, it was entirely in consequence of the system pursued and sanctioned by her Majesty's Government. He was ashamed to think that his late Majesty's Government had appointed to a high station a man who had made declara tions which had a most wicked effect.—( Cries of " Name.") Her Majesty's Attorney_ General.—( Loud laughter from the Ministerial benches, and cries of "He ought to be im peached.") It might be a matter of laughter to Honourable Gentlemen opposite. The SPE AKER hoped the Hon. Member did not intend to impute motives to any one. Sir F. TRENCH wished particularly to guard against so doing, but ho was convinced that the tendency of the Learned Gentleman's argument was to say, that he visited Ireland, and found a generous people ; that he turned to Scotland, and found long swords, and people who knew how to use them, and that the killing of Archbishop Sharpe was no mur der. In regard to imputing motives to other Gentlemen, he had particularly guarded himself ; but, he must say, that it was shameful for any Government to fix on such a man to be her Majesty's Attorney-General.—( Hear.) However, he was glad _to say that the prospects of the country were growing brighfer. The people of Ireland were returning to their senses—(Cheers and laughter)—and the Hen. and Learned Member for Dublin flies agitation.—( Renewed laughter, and cheers.) Indeed, he (Sir F. Trench), had heard that another Learned Agitator had recently been hooted and pelted in his progress through the county of Tipperary. On his soul and conscience he believed that political agitation, by the extraordinary talents of those Gentlemen for mischief, acted on the passions of the excitable people of Ireland so strongly, that they might even be induced to commit murder. Their best qualities were misdirected to the worst of purposes. (Cheers from the Tories.) As to the question of Canada, he would leave the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies in the hands of the Noble Lord the Member for Marylebone— ( Great cheers from the Tories)—who said that the administra tion of Canada was not worthy of that care which should be taken of so bright a jewel in the Crown. He would confine him self to that part of the question which came nearer home—the administration of Ireland.—( Hear.) There was much boasting of the beneficial effects which that country experienced from the present Government; but he held in his hand the Hue and Cry of the 24th of last month, in which he found proclama tions announcing that 21 murders had been recently com mitted.—(Tory cheers.) Was that a proof of the tranquillity of Ireland? Was that a proof of the benefits conferred upon the country by the present Administration ?—( Cheers.) Mr. O'DIL LON BROWN wished to state the reasons why he should not vote either for the amendment or the origi nal motion. Both had but one object—to discipline the pre sent Government. He did not approve of the colonial policy of the Government, and he thought their conduct towards Canada especially was calculated to provoke rebellion, which had at length broke out. He disapproved of the Hon. Baro net's motion, because it was directed against an individual, whereas it ought to be directed against the Cabinet of which he was a member.—( Hear, hear.) He thought that was not fair, nor just, nor manly—(hear, hear)--and he would rather vote for the amendment of the Noble Member for Liverpool, and censure the whole of Ministry, if he thought it possible to get to-morrow a more Radical Government, and one which would more fully represent the feelings of the country. But as the Hon. Beronet was not prepared to form a more liberal Administration, the direct object of the motion must be to put in the places of her Majesty's Administration the Hon. Gentlemen opposite. But if that were done what would be the Hon. Baronet's next step ? If he was consistent he must endeavour to dislodge them ; and was it not most ludi crous to place them in power for such a purpose, when he con sidered the activity and the wile of the Hon. Gentlemen op posite—(Hear)—when he considered the seductive means by which in Parliamentary parlance they might obtain a good working majority, he thought it would be very difficult to do so. Although the influence of public opinion might prevent them remaining long in office, they might remain long enough to do great mischief. lie regarded the return of the Tories to office as the most terrible calamity that could be inflicted on the country.—( Great laughter.) He would have no objec tion to supplant the present Administration if they could be replaced by a more liberal one. There were three parties in the country—the Tories, who governed the many for the ad vantage of the few—the Whigs, who governed the many by the will of the many, for the advantage of the few—and the Radicals who governed the many by the will of the many for their own advantage.—(Shouts of laughter.) There were some Whigs who wished to retard the progress of Reform ; but the Tories would force the machine back altogether. On these grounds he should oppose the motion of the lion. Ba ronet and the Amendment of the Noble Lord. Mr. TANC RE D would vote against the motion of the Hon. I3aronet, the Member for Leeds, nor could he accede to the amendment of the Noble Lord. He considered that the selection of Lord Glenelg was most unjustifiable and ungene rous. He ( Mr. Tancred) had had the pleasure of knowing him for a very great number of years, and he considered his character one of the most respectable in point of moral and mental qualification. He would not follow the Hon. Baronet in all his observations on the Colonial system. With many of those observations he concurred; he thought that the govern ment of all Colonies had been productivelof great cruelty. Look, for instance, at Spain : she had an empire of colonies, but her greedy disposition had degraded her colonies and herself. He thought if there were any of the English Colonies where the Government had been beneficent it was the Colonies of Upper and Lower Canada. He believed that in a great measure the cause of many of the dis turbances that had taken place was to be attributed to the French Canadians. It was true that they were men of a kind and affable disposition, but it was equally true that they were remarkably credulous and jealous. The English Canadians had far exceeded them, and that had created jea lousies and heart-burning among them. The Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool was obliged to admit that the seeds of mischief had been planted in the Canadas in former times, and unfortunately those seeds had fructified. Formerly any person was thought good enough to be placed on the judicial bench and to fill the offices of the State. There could be no doubt that up to 1828 the Canadians had grievances of a serious na ture to complain of ; but from that time a very different system had prevailed, and any impartial person in the colony must admit that the government of that country had been parental in the extreme. The question was whether the Govern ment had not suppressed that revolt with as little less of life and sacrifice of property as possible by what was called their vacillating and dilatory conduct.—( Hear, hear.) He asserted he considered the principal cause of that revolt having been so speedily suppressed was the cir cumstance of its having made manifest to all, to the well inten tioned people of the Province, that it was with the utmost pain the Government at home would sanction an)thing like violence. Not only was that felt in Canada, but also in the great neighbouring Republic. Under these circumstances he never would be a party to assert that any evil had arisen from the policy pursued by the Noble Lord. It had been a successful policy in its result, and was equally humane and wise. Ile should most certainly support the Government on this occasion. Mr. RICH (we believe) said it was not his intention to trouble the House with a thrice repeated talc on Canada. That subject was discussed six weeks ago, and apparently finally settled. The real fact was, it was not the affairs of Canada that induced the Gentlemen opposite to say they had no confidence in the present Government, the real object was to get a Tory Government substituted for the p-esent Reform Government. —(liaar.) The Noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool, with his ready cut and dried amendment, and his notes and memoranda, already ticketted and doquetted, disclaimed against the unhappy dilemma in which he was placed by the negative of the Noble Lord the Secretary. for Foreign Affairs to the motion of the Hon. Member for Leeds; but the Noble Lord who followed him on the same side of the House let out that this was a party gees tion ; and he would leave those two Noble Lords to reconcile their various readings of the question. The Noble Baronet the Member for Leeds made his motion--the Noble Lord moved a wary amendment ; let the Noble Lord come forward and boldly avow his motive. Let him stand up and say whether he contended for a Tory or a Liberal Government, and not allow his amendment to be masked by a trumpery al lusion to Canada. The question was whether we were to have a continuation of those principles which, for the last seven years, had advanced this country in prosperity and ge neral information to a degree that had never before been wit nessed, or a return to those principles which had acted so prejudicially to the welfare of this empire. Was it a mere mercenary scramble for office that the Gentlemen opposite were making, or was it not for a change of principle? He would not do them the injustice of supposing the former.—( Hear, hear, hear.) But let him warn Honourable Gentlemen opposite, if they came into office their first act must be to dissolve Parliament; and what majority could they reasonably expect? The country would be thrown back into the same situation it was three years ago, and driven into a series of dissolutions which nobody could see the cud of. The Tory Government had had sixteen years of peace, during which no doubt they had brought forward their best measures; and yet, what was the situation into which they had brought the country ? As nearly a state of anarchy as could be ; so that his Majesty, after having ascended the throne for six months, was unable to go into the city. Ireland was in that state which bid defiance to all law, and scarcely then any thing was heard throughout it but repeal. What were the external relations of the country ? A distinguished personage, then a Member of this House, had predicted that peace could not be preserved for six montlT, yet peace had been preserved, and by a re forming Ministry. Property in the Colonies was then worth 20 per cent. less than it was now, and a mass of brutalised human beings,who called in vain to Tory Governments for emancipation, The North American Colonies were much more discontented than they were at present, and though rebellion had unfortu nately broken out, yet it bad been repressed with much less loss of human life, and by wiser and more humane measures than Hen. Gentlemen opposite, in their worldly wisdom, would suggest. He would not stop to dwell upon enormous taxation,